In Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, there is a group of jurors in a jury room that are deliberating a First-Degree Murder case. This trial takes place in New York and some of the jurors have biases that affect the case immensely. Throughout the book, the different jurors say different things that help the case move onwards towards a verdict. All of the jurors have different reactions to the case. It is evident that the author leaves many things about the case details and the verdict out for the reader to decide. Reginald Rose left Twelve Angry Men with a pending verdict so that people could relate more to his book, to show the impossibility of a perfect justice system, and to show how hard it is to be confident in one’s own opinion. Rose
…show more content…
Throughout the book, it is evident that Rose is trying to tell the reader that this jury is not a fair jury and that even though the jurors know it they still won’t call a hung jury. For example, in the knife scene, Juror 8 takes out a knife that he bought to prove his point, which is illegal and he knows it is, “That’s right. I broke the law.”(23) When Juror 8 exclaims that he broke the law the other jurors should have gone to the guard and called a hung jury. Since they didn’t, it is obvious that they broke that law and that this trial was not fair. Through just witnessing the way this jury worked it almost makes one feel as though the justice system is not just but actually improper and needs to be reformed. Rose shows many ways that the justice system is wrong and how it can be fixed by just having people take their civil duty seriously and not as a joke. Another way Rose shows the faultiness of the justice system is by showing that some of these jury members gave up battling both sides and just voted that more popular way, “All right. ‘Not Guilty.’”(72) Because this happened, the jury became unfair and there should have been something going through at least one of the jurors heads that made them feel like something wrong was happening, but not one of them spoke up making …show more content…
Throughout the book, all of the jurors show different levels of confidence, from very confident to no confidence. Juror 11 is one of the jurors that shows a high level of confidence when he knows he is right, “I don’t have to defend my decision to you.”(41) Juror 11 shows his confidence in every comment he says. He shows confidence by not letting anyone question him and making them think he is right even when he might not be, showing that confidence can win an argument even if the confident person says incorrect things. In other words, confidence is the key to success. Rose shows lack of confidence in Juror 6 through what Juror 6 says, “My boss does the supposing.”(30) Juror 6, a house painter, perfectly illustrates lack of confidence by saying that he never thinks for himself. Throughout the book, it is seen that Juror 6 rarely talks, showing that when one doesn’t have confidence in themselves then they won’t even try to say anything. In the real world, confidence in oneself is the key to being successful and the key to being able to give input to a
Throughout the book, it is evident that Rose is trying to tell the reader that this jury is not a fair jury and that even though the jurors know it they still won’t call a hung jury. For example, in the knife scene, Juror 8 takes out a knife that he bought to prove his point, which is illegal and he knows it is, “That’s right. I broke the law.”(23) When Juror 8 exclaims that he broke the law the other jurors should have gone to the guard and called a hung jury. Since they didn’t, it is obvious that they broke that law and that this trial was not fair. Through just witnessing the way this jury worked it almost makes one feel as though the justice system is not just but actually improper and needs to be reformed. Rose shows many ways that the justice system is wrong and how it can be fixed by just having people take their civil duty seriously and not as a joke. Another way Rose shows the faultiness of the justice system is by showing that some of these jury members gave up battling both sides and just voted that more popular way, “All right. ‘Not Guilty.’”(72) Because this happened, the jury became unfair and there should have been something going through at least one of the jurors heads that made them feel like something wrong was happening, but not one of them spoke up making …show more content…
Throughout the book, all of the jurors show different levels of confidence, from very confident to no confidence. Juror 11 is one of the jurors that shows a high level of confidence when he knows he is right, “I don’t have to defend my decision to you.”(41) Juror 11 shows his confidence in every comment he says. He shows confidence by not letting anyone question him and making them think he is right even when he might not be, showing that confidence can win an argument even if the confident person says incorrect things. In other words, confidence is the key to success. Rose shows lack of confidence in Juror 6 through what Juror 6 says, “My boss does the supposing.”(30) Juror 6, a house painter, perfectly illustrates lack of confidence by saying that he never thinks for himself. Throughout the book, it is seen that Juror 6 rarely talks, showing that when one doesn’t have confidence in themselves then they won’t even try to say anything. In the real world, confidence in oneself is the key to being successful and the key to being able to give input to a